Feature Request: Marking patrons that have lost equipment / "Patron has lost equipment" option in check in procedures

[cmedeiros808]

It'd be useful to see how many times a patron has lost equipment so that once a certain threshold is reached they can have their privileges restricted. One great way to have this work is to have an option in the check in procedures "Patron has lost equipment" so that when we have been notified, by the patron or otherwise, we can check in the reservation.

[orenyk]

I think from a check-in perspective, simply checking it in with a note saying the equipment was lost, followed by immediately deactivating the equipment, is sufficient for now. This could be simplified with a checkin type dropdown; it defaults to normal which is our current behavior, or there's a "item lost" option that automatically deactivates the equipment with an appropriate status message.

In terms of reporting user behavior, we should extend our current reporting functionality to also allow for the review of user behavior for banning purposes. I'm also thinking it might be worth adding a "flags" field for users and automatically banning them or submitting them for admin review when their flag count gets too high. Thoughts?

[cmedeiros808]

The flag idea sounds like it'd work. The main concern was being able to
identify those piece of equipment that are deactivated because they're lost
as opposed to some other reason, and doing so in a way that's simple and
intuitive for the circ desk workers to document. Flagging users would be
something that would only need to be visible from an admin perspective ,
and allows us to view when a patron has a history of infractions of BMEC
ToS besides overdue reservations (which is currently the only type that can
be automatically logged)

[orenyk]

Great! We can leave this issue open for user 'flagging' which will likely take some time to implement, but I think the "item lost" checkbox fits nicely in with #728. What do you think @squidgetx?

[squidgetx]

Let's set it for 4.0

[orenyk]

We have added an archive action in #728, although I'm not sure this completely resolves the issue above (ignoring flagging users for repeated offenses). I think we might want to add an admin e-mail for archived reservations (since it should only be for special cases) - this can be done in that PR. We can also have an admin-only button on the user "show" page to "flag" users that increments a counter parameter. It doesn't give a ton of information about why the user was flagged, but unless we want to implement a user notes field that doesn't seem too feasible. That said, a user notes field might be worthwhile... leaving this in the backlog for now.

[orenyk]

This is similar / tied to #462, we should work on them together.

[orenyk]

Bumping to Wish List.

[orenyk]

This is now more relevant to #1216 as #462 changed to be a refactoring of statuses.

[orenyk]

After thinking about counter caches for #1501, we might just want to add "red flags" as a counter cache on users that is incremented each time a user performs a high-risk action (overdue reservations, lost / damaged equipment returned reservation, etc). Seems manageable enough, we'd just have to tweak it with client feedback.